Site Mobile Navigation

Passions Flare as House Debates Birth Control Rule

Bishop William E. Lori, a Roman Catholic, left, and the Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, a Lutheran, at a House hearing Thursday on a rule requiring insurers to pay for birth control for women.Credit
Luke Sharrett for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s compromise plan to require free insurance coverage of contraceptives for women touched off a tumultuous debate on Thursday in which members of Congress mixed political theater with soul-searching over potential threats to religious liberty.

Lutheran and Baptist clergymen and an Orthodox rabbi joined a Roman Catholic bishop in telling lawmakers that Mr. Obama’s latest policy of shifting the responsibility for paying for the contraceptives from religious institutions to their health insurers was unworkable and did not allay concerns about government entanglement with religion.

“There is no real difference” between the original requirement and the attempted compromise, said John H. Garvey, president of the Catholic University of America, where 81 percent of undergraduates and 59 percent of graduate students are Catholic.

The first of two lineups of witnesses at a House committee hearing on Thursday consisted of five men.

Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, Democrat of New York, asked: “Where are the women? It’s outrageous that the Republicans would not allow a single individual representing the tens of millions of women who want and need insurance coverage for basic preventive health care services, including family planning.”

The witnesses, who testified at a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, had different views about contraception, but all said they were uneasy with the federal policy.

“The putative accommodation is no accommodation at all,” said the rabbi, Meir Soloveichik of Yeshiva University and Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun in New York City. “Religious organizations would still be obligated to provide employees with an insurance policy that facilitates acts violating the organization’s religious tenets.”

With his proposal, Mr. Obama may have tamped down the public furor over mandating contraceptive coverage. But in Congress, it appears, the election-year debate is just beginning.

Representative Gerald E. Connolly, Democrat of Virginia, told the witnesses that they were being “used for a political agenda,” to embarrass Mr. Obama. “Today’s hearing is a sham, a shameful exercise,” Mr. Connolly said.

Representative Joe Walsh, Republican of Illinois, insisted: “This is not about women. This is not about contraceptives. This is about religious freedom.”

The Senate and the House plan to vote soon on legislation to block Mr. Obama’s policy.

Under the policy, most health insurance plans must cover birth control for women — all contraceptive drugs and devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration — as well as sterilization procedures. Church-affiliated universities, hospitals and charities would not have to provide contraceptive coverage to female employees, nor would they have to subsidize its cost. Coverage for birth control would be offered to women directly by their employers’ insurance companies, “with no role for religious employers who oppose contraception,” the White House said.

Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, described this as “an accounting gimmick.”

In a rule published Wednesday in the Federal Register, the Obama administration reaffirmed, “without change,” the narrow exemption for churches and other houses of worship. The administration said it would allow a “safe harbor from enforcement” for one year, while it revises the rule to address concerns of church-affiliated organizations that have religious objections to covering contraceptive services.

The Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, president of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, said he had no ill will toward the administration. “I pray for the president every day,” Mr. Harrison said, even as he expressed “deep distress” over the new policy and complained of “government intrusions into Christian conscience and practice.”

Representative William Lacy Clay, Democrat of Missouri, said both sides were distorting the facts. “I’m disappointed in some who suggest that the Catholic bishops’ stance represents something sinister, that it is an attempt to deny all women, of any faith, access to any contraception or reproductive health care of any kind,” Mr. Clay said. “I don’t think that’s the case. I’m also disappointed in those who claim that the administration has an agenda: to increase abortions, sterilizations and contraceptive use by Catholics. The facts don’t back that up, not in the slightest.”

The committee heard testimony from two women, both opposed to the administration policy.

The House Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi, said women who could testify to the need for contraceptive coverage had been excluded. “What is it that men don’t understand about women’s health?” Ms. Pelosi said. “And how central the issue of family planning is to that?”

A version of this article appears in print on February 17, 2012, on page A13 of the New York edition with the headline: Passions Flare as House Debates Birth Control Rule. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe